Interim Report 1 - TRACECA ORG...Implementation of the Regional Road Safety Action Plan for the...

Land Transport Safety and SecurityEuropeAid/126786/C/SER/Multi

This Project is funded

by the European Union

1

The European Union’s TRACECA programmefor Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Moldova,

Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Ukraine, Uzbekistan

EUROPEAID/133698/C/SER/MULTI

Implementation of the Regional Road SafetyAction Plan for the Neighbourhood East andCentral Asian Countries – Service Contract

Interim Report 1

Reporting period: January 15th 2014 –July 14th 2014

August 2014

Implementation of the Regional Road Safety Action Planfor the Neighbourhood East and Central Asian CountriesTRACECA – Road Safety II Project (ENPI/2013/333-650)

This Project is funded by the European Union

Project implemented by in association with 1

Project Title: TRACECA – Road Safety II

Project Number: EuropAid/133698/C/SER/Multi

Beneficiary Countries: Armenia, Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan,Kyrgyzstan, Moldova, Tajikistan, Ukraine,Uzbekistan.

Project Partner Contractor

Name: Directorate-General for Developmentand Cooperation - Europe AidEuropean Commission

Consortium SAFEGE –IMC -Grant Thornton –Granturco, led by SAFEGE

Address: Rue Joseph II Gulledelle 92

B-1000 Brussels B-1200 Brussels

Tel. number: +32 2 29 93 763 +32 2 739 46 90; +331 46 14 71 52

Fax number: +32 2 742 38 91; +331 47 24 72 02

E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected],[email protected]

Contact person: Mr. Stefaan BIL, ProgrammeManager - Transport

Contact persons: Olivier Montagnes andJoanna Tallec, Project Managers

Signatures:

……………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………

Date of report: August 2014Reporting period: 15 Jan – 14 July 2014




Recipient list

1 Mr. Stefaan Bil Program manager EU neighbourhood East team – DEVCO –Brussels; E-mail: [email protected]

2 Eduard Biriucov Secretary General TRACECA SECRETARIAT hq, BakuE-Mail: [email protected]

3 Gagik Grigoryan National secretary Armenia Traceca Secretary in ArmeniaE-mail: [email protected]

4 Akif Mustafayev National secretary Azerbaijan Traceca Secretary in AzerbaijanEmail: [email protected]

5 Natia Mikeladze National secretary Georgia Traceca Secretary in GeorgiaE-mail: [email protected]

6 Marat Saduov National secretary Kazakhstan Traceca Secretary in KazakhstanE-mail: [email protected],[email protected]

7 Adylbek Akmatov National Secretary Kyrgyzstan Traceca secretary in KyrgyzstanE-mail: [email protected]

8 Solih Muminov National Secretary Tajikistan Traceca Secretary in TajikistanE-mail: [email protected],[email protected]

9 Valentyn Kasapchuk National secretary Ukraine TRACECA Secretary in UkraineE-mail: [email protected],[email protected]

10 Sherbek Erbekov*(until a new TRACECA countrysecretary can be appointed)

Director General “National Centrefor Normative and TechnicalSupport of Automobile and RiverTransport”, Uzbekistan

(+998 90) 355 53 08; (+998 71) 241 03 46Email: [email protected]

11 Andrei Cuculescu National secretary Moldova TRACECA Secretary in [email protected]

12 Denis Daniilidis Head of EU-Mission Turkmenistan +993 12 34 97 52, M: +993 66 75 56 [email protected]

13 Hoa-Binh Adjemian Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Armenia

+374 10 54 64 [email protected]

14 Federico Berna Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Azerbaijan

99412-497-20-63 +extension [email protected]

15 Ramon ReigadaGranda

Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Georgia

(995 32) 294 37 63 / 294 37 [email protected]

16 René Mally Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Kazakhstan

7 /7172/ 971 [email protected]

17 Johannes StenbaekMadsen

Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Kyrgyzstan

+996 312 261 004 (ext. 112)[email protected]

18 Kaido Sirel Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Moldova

(+37322) [email protected]

19 Alexandre Darras Project ManagerEU Delegation Moldova

M: +373 60 860 237, +373 22 50 52 [email protected]

20 Ovidiu Mic Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Tajikistan

+992 37 221 74 07/ 227 09 74+992 44 600 80 90, M: +992 96 561 76 [email protected]

21 Walter Tretton Head of Operations Section EUDelegation Ukraine

380 (44) 390 [email protected]




Executive SummaryThis is the first interim report of the Project and covers the initial 6 months of activity 15 Jan -14 July 2014. The project commenced with a fact-finding trip around all 10 TRACECAbeneficiary countries to ascertain developments since the previous EU funded TRACECARegional road safety project, which was completed in late 2011 /early 2012. This enableddiscussions with key stakeholders to try to identify the most urgent needs in each country sothat appropriate expertise can be planned by the project team to do capacity building ineach country. Impact indicators were devised to assess the current stage of implementationof the EU funded regional road safety action plan and each country was benchmarkedagainst the requirements of the Regional Road Safety Action Plan and against the averageof the other countries in the region.This identified the strengths and weaknesses in each country and will enable, in due course,more targeted support to be provided by our team of experts as needed. An InceptionReport1 outlined the main findings from the fact finding visits and presented the proposedcapacity building and institutional strengthening activities planned for the rest of the project.A Benchmarking Report2 was also produced to record the starting position in each sector ineach country at project commencement. Impact monitoring periodically during the projectand at project end using the same impact indicators will demonstrate clearly whether theproject has been successful in delivering the desired impacts and outcomes of getting thecountries to start implementing the recommendations of the Regional Road Safety ActionPlan. Both reports are downloadable in English and Russian from our website as shownbelow.A series of regional, sub regional and national capacity building workshops have beendevised in safety engineering, international agreements and conventions, crash datasystems, vehicle safety etc. and these will commence from mid-September 2014. In addition,each country will be assisted via a National action-planning workshop to develop a roadsafety action plan to address the priority areas needing most urgent attention in eachcountry. These action plans will all be drafted before the end of 2014. Follow up workshops,training courses and advice /support will be provided by the project team during 2015 toassist each country to commence implementing their country specific action plans.There have been no serious problems during this first period other than that there have beensome delays in implementing the Turkmenistan National action planning workshop, due to agovernment reshuffle the days when the workshop was due to be implemented. This was thereason to postpone this workshop until January 2015. Most of the period since delivering theinception report has been spent in recruiting specialists, getting them approved by EU and indetailed planning of the workshop and training programme. The project is basically onschedule. Current status of each component is summarised as follows:Component 1 – Inclusion of Turkmenistan: slight delay in implementing action planningworkshop and now scheduled to be implemented in Jan 2015Component 2 – Regulatory and institutional reforms: workshops scheduled for late 2014and advice is ongoing regarding legislation and Management /coordination of road safety inUkraine

1 Inception report – EU funded TRACECA road safety project – Safege, March 20142 Benchmarking report - – EU funded TRACECA road safety project – Safege, May 2014

both downloadable from http://www.traceca-org.org/en/technical-assistance/traceca-road-safety-ii/downloads




Component 3 – Safer Infrastructure and vehicles: Safety engineering workshopsscheduled to commence mid Sept 2014 and vehicle safety activities being planned for early2015.Component 4 – Communication / visibility: Articles about the project and role of EU fordistribution to media have been prepared and given to each EU Delegation for PR use andpresentations on the EU funded regional road safety project have been given at 3international and 1 Ukrainian road safety conferences / workshops.

The resources used up so far (as at end of the first 6 months) are summarised below:

The current stage of implementation of the elements identified for action within the previousEU funded regional road safety action plan is as shown below (scale is from 0% to 100% sofor example, Georgia is around 40% of the way towards implementation of the aspectsidentified in the action plan while Ukraine is at present only around 25% of the way towardsimplementation of the regional road safety action plan recommendations. Progress in eachsector will be monitored using impact indicators and reported on periodically as the projectproceeds so that developmental impact of the project can be clearly monitored duringimplementation and evaluated at project end.

ItemProject

timeconsumed

Mandays consumed Incidental budgetconsumed

to dateKey

expertsNon keyexperts(STE)

Non KeyExperts (JTE )

At end of first 6months 25% 36.8% 0.9% 14.1% 5.7%




Contents

Executive Summary................................................................................................................ 31 Project Synopsis .............................................................................................................. 62 Summary of progress during previous reporting period .................................................... 83 Project progress in Reporting Period from 15 th January to 14th July 2014......................... 8

3.1 Overview of activities ................................................................................................. 83.2 Component 1: Inclusion of Turkmenistan into TRACECA Regional road safety action

plan........................................................................................................................... 93.3 Component 2: Major Institutional Issues – Regulatory and institutional reform .......... 93.3.1 Management, coordination and funding...........................................................103.3.2 Crash data systems.........................................................................................103.3.3 EU agreements and UNECE Conventions ......................................................103.3.4 Safety awareness workshops ..........................................................................103.3.5 Crash costing studies ......................................................................................113.3.6 Study tours and UNECE working groups .........................................................113.4 Component 3: Safer Infrastructure and Vehicles...................................................... 113.4.1 Safer road Infrastructure .................................................................................113.4.2 Safer vehicles..................................................................................................113.5 Component 4: Communications and visibility ........................................................... 123.5.1 Short articles that can be used by EU Delegations in each country .................123.5.2 Participation in workshops/seminars on road safety to make presentations ....123.5.3 Website /TRACECA portal ..............................................................................133.5.4 EU funded TRACECA Regional road safety project vertical banner ................133.6 Miscellaneous issues ............................................................................................... 143.6.1 Getting EU approvals: .....................................................................................143.6.2 Ukraine as a beneficiary country. ....................................................................143.6.3 Deviations from work plan ...............................................................................143.6.4 Resource utilization .........................................................................................14

4 Adjustments to TOR and contract amendments (if any) during current reporting period . 155 Project planning for the next period ................................................................................ 156 Annexes ......................................................................................................................... 16

6.1 ANNEX A: Current Status of Action Plan implementation by country ....................... 176.2 ANNEX B: Man days input to date ( up to end of first period ).................................. 216.3 ANNEX C: Proposed workshops and training courses programme –next period .... 226.4 ANNEX D: Characteristics of road safety in TRACECA beneficiary countries ......... 246.5 ANNEX E: Revised work schedule and staffing chart .............................................. 31




1 Project Synopsis

1.1 This project is a follow up to an earlier EU funded regional road safety project thatcovered 9 countries in TRACECA region and which identified the areas of need in terms ofroad safety in each country and developed a generic regional road safety action plan3 for thecountries to use as a model for developing their own country specific action plans. Althoughthis regional road safety action plan was accepted and endorsed by all the beneficiarycountries in 2012 and despite several years having passed since this endorsement, none ofthe countries were able to develop their own country specific Action Plans as had beenintended. Furthermore, Turkmenistan, a future potential TRACECA member, was notincluded in that original assessment or the regional action plan so needed to be brought intothe action plan.

1.2 The regional action plan identified actions to be implemented in six sectors as follows:

1. Regulatory and Institutional Reform2. Safer roads3. Safer vehicles4. Safer road users / behaviour5. Emergency medical services6. Changing attitudes

1.2 The EU, in order to assist the TRACECA beneficiary countries, initiated further technicalassistance to help the countries of the region in developing their individual country specificaction plans (based on the regional action plan ) and in implementing the improvements thathad been identified in the regional action plan. For convenience, the downstream technicalassistance was split so that sectors 1-3 were allocated to the Consortium and sectors 4-6were allocated to a GRSP led consortium. These two downstream Technical Assistanceprojects are to run in parallel and are both to be completed over the 2-year periodrespectively of Jan 2014 - Jan 2016 and Mar 2014 – Feb 2016 with each consortium advisingand training through capacity building workshops, training courses and institutionaldevelopment in their respective sectors.

1.3 Since road safety, because of the need for interaction between the sectors has to beimplemented via a holistic approach, the two consortia have agreed to coordinate theirefforts and to even provide inputs as needed into each others’ workshops so that acomprehensive multi sector approach is applied to improve road safety in each country. Inparticular, the action planning workshops to develop a holistic priority action plan for eachcountry will involve inputs from experts from both consortia, with each being responsible fordeveloping action plans and interventions for their sectors for inclusion in the country specific

3 TRACECA regional road safety action plan, SAFEGE Consultants, Brussels, 2012




action plans. This will result in a single comprehensive country specific action plan in eachcountry.

1.4 The team leaders and regional coordinators from each consortium have agreed tomeet or have conference calls at regular intervals in order to coordinate activities, trainingand other initiatives across the region.

1.5 This interim report outlines only the activities and progress of the Consortium led bySafege and covers the first 6 months of the project 15 Jan -14 Jul 2014.




2 Summary of progress during previous reporting period

Since this project just commenced on 15 Jan 2014, there was no previous reporting period.

3 Project progress in Reporting Period from 15 th January to 14th

July 2014

3.1 Overview of activitiesSeveral years had passed since the EU funded regional road safety action plan had beenpublished and considerable time had also elapsed since the technical proposal had beensubmitted to EU. It was therefore essential that our project team assess for themselves thecurrent state of progress in road safety in each sector in each country. This permitted betterunderstanding of the needs and types of technical assistance that will be required to assistthe countries. It was also necessary to assess if any aspects of the TOR were no longer validbefore writing the Inception report. In order to do this the team leader (key expert 1) and theroad safety engineer (key expert 2) made a fact finding visit to every one of the 10 countries(including Turkmenistan) and had discussions with key stakeholders and with theirassistance made an initial assessment of progress in each sector.In order to do this in a consistent, systematic and replicable way, a benchmarking templatewas devised to assess current state of progress in each sector and which can also later beused for monitoring progress in each sector towards the desired impacts. (This used the DEEtechnique4 to develop the benchmarking framework with sector specific impact indicatorsthat could give some confidence that the required impact or functionality was occurring. Thisenables assessment of progress as a %age towards the desired impact). For convenience,completeness and to maintain a holistic approach and to present a visual snapshot of theoverall situation at project commencement, the assessment was done for all six sectors.Even though our Consortium is only providing technical assistance in 3 sectors, frameworkswere devised for the other 3 sectors as well so that all sectors could be covered in the initialbenchmarking (These same frameworks will be used for monitoring progress periodicallyduring implementation). It has been agreed with the EU Task Manager and the GRSP ledconsortium that our team will monitor and report on progress of all six sectors at regularintervals and that GRSP will provide the benchmarking information at relevant times forinclusion in the monitoring system).After the fact-funding mission, the project team produced an Inception report5 with outlinedetails of proposed training courses and workshops and a tentative work plan and staffingschedule. Although not a requirement of the TOR or the contract, the project team alsoprepared a benchmarking report 6 in order to show the starting position in each sector and ineach country. This enabled identification of strengths and weaknesses in individual sectorsand in individual countries as well as enabling comparisons of progress in individualcountries against the average of the region. Annex A summarises the current status ofprogress in each sector in each country.

4 www.dee-global.com or www.dee-software.com5 TRACECA - Road Safety II – inception report, Safege, March 20146 TRACECA – Road Safety II - Benchmarking Report, Safege. May 2014




The major work since submission of the inception and benchmarking reports has been inplanning of workshops and training courses, in recruitment of appropriate experts to meet theidentified needs of the countries and in making submissions to EU to get approvals ofexperts, missions and workshops.The proposed programme of workshops are shown as Annex C and the revised tentativeprogramme of activities and staffing is included as Annex E.The activities undertaken during this reporting period in each component are summarisedbelow in the next sub-chapters.

3.2 Component 1: Inclusion of Turkmenistan into TRACECARegional road safety action plan

Turkmenistan is a very difficult place to work and requires time and several visits to movethings even a little bit forward - even getting visas to visit is difficult and time consuming.However, a first short visit was made as part of the fact-finding trip in Feb 2014 to establishinitial contacts with key government agencies, to make initial assessment of needs and toagree the protocol for providing assistance. A second short visit was made in May 2014 by aNKE with existing contacts in Turkmenistan to discuss and agree with key stakeholders,possible dates in July 2014 for a workshop and these dates were agreed/ confirmed withrelevant government officials. A team visit was made in early July to try to implement theNational Action Plan Workshop as agreed. However it was not possible for the Ministry ofHealth (who were to host the event) to hold the workshop because of a major reshuffle ingovernment that week and some other problems at the Turkmenistan side relating to lack ofa formal letter / authorisation by Council of Ministers, even though they had been informedverbally by senior officials to be ready to organise the event on the agreed dates.In the event, this workshop had to be cancelled. However, during the project experts’ 2 daysstay in Ashgabat, waiting and negotiating with officials to commence the workshop, theopportunity was taken to drive around the roads to see road design quality. In addition somevery useful meetings were held with local offices of UNICEF and Red Crescent (both highlyregarded by Turkmenistan government) to get their agreement/willingness to support EUefforts to promote road safety in Turkmenistan. They have both agreed to push behind thescenes for more to be done on road safety and have even offered to co-host the eventualworkshop so that their influence and local reputation can be harnessed to give higher priorityand profile to the workshop. A revised date for the workshop is being finalised but is nowlikely to be 13-16 Jan 2015.

3.3 Component 2: Major Institutional Issues – Regulatory andinstitutional reform

This sector covers management coordination and funding of road safety training, crash datasystems awareness raising amongst key decision makers, domestic safety legislation,international EU agreements and UNECE conventions, road safety training workshops andaction planning workshops Progress in each of these areas is as follows.




3.3.1 Management, coordination and fundingThe existing organisational structures in several countries have been reviewed and possibleareas for improvement discussed. Assistance/ advice was given to local stakeholders inUkraine in organising a Road Safety Forum to get the key agencies talking to each other anda local multi agency expert group is being established for the project team to work with inorganising the National Action Planning Workshop at end of Sept 2014. Discussions havebeen held with senior Ministry of infrastructure officials in Ukraine and even directly with theMinister and his senior advisers about how to improve coordination and management of roadsafety in Ukraine. Some advice and assistance is being given in drafting safety legislation toestablish better coordination mechanisms in Ukraine. Discussions have also been held withIFI s in each country to map existing safety activities and to coordinate activities so that thecapacity building activities of our project can be followed up with IFI funded road safetycomponents in their loans. Additional follow up funds including some grants for road safetyhave already been agreed / generated with some IFIs for Georgia, Armenia and Ukraine.

3.3.2 Crash data systemsNo specific activity yet other than planning the workshop and follow up inputs by crash dataspecialists.

3.3.3 EU agreements and UNECE ConventionsCurrent status of the 7 key agreements / conventions in each country has been assessed,relevant experts identified to cover the areas of need/ deficiency .A regional workshop isbeing planned for early December 2014 to agree individual country needs. The project teamexperts will then be deployed to relevant countries to help local experts as needed within theresources of the budget.In addition to the 7 safety orientated transport related agreements already identified forattention in the TOR, the team will introduce (via the training courses under the safer roadssector ) additional important EU directives related to road safety such as the EU Directive onsafety in road tunnels 7 and the EU Directive on Road Infrastructure Safety andmanagement8.

3.3.4 Safety awareness workshopsIn each country, the project team intends to establish a multi sector / multi agency expertgroup to ensure close collaboration with the project team. These groups will help organiseand hopefully will take ownership of the national workshop in each country, as well asoverseeing implementation of the individual country specific action plans for the concernedcountry. In order to raise their knowledge of road safety issues we propose to run 2-dayspecial road safety training workshops in each country specifically targeted at the needs ofthe 10-12 persons of the expert group so that they have a good overview of how road safetyshould be managed and action plans implemented. We will also take a smaller number ofmost senior decision makers (perhaps 2 from each country) on a study tour to see how roadsafety is managed in other countries, which have had particular success in addressing road

7 EU directive 2004/54/EC on minimum requirements for tunnels in Trans- European roadnetwork8 EU directive 2008/96/EC on road infrastructure safety and management




safety over the last decade. These activities have been planned during the current reportingperiod.

3.3.5 Crash costing studiesMost governments do not appreciate the huge economic losses being sustained due to roadcrashes (typically 3-5% of their annual GDP in most cases) so an important task is to getindependent locally derived estimates of the costs of a typical fatal, serious and slight injury,the costs of a fatal crash, serious injury crash and slight injury crash and damage only crashso that cost benefit analyses can be done of alternative options when considering road safetyinitiatives. In addition, understanding the overall losses to the economy enables governmentto start seeing expenditure on road safety as an “investment” rather than as they currently do- as a “cost”. Suitable economic research institutes and economic researchers have beenidentified in most of the countries and experts from their will be hired to carry out theeconomic research studies under the direction and mentoring of the Team leader so thatlocal researchers can be trained in the methods and calculations to make such estimates.This will leave behind some knowledge / expertise and a resource for each country so thatsuch calculations and research can be repeated independently by such researchers in futureyears. Studies will commence and will be reported upon during the next reporting period.

3.3.6 Study tours and UNECE working groupsNo activities or progress has been made in this area yet as these study tours andparticipation in UNECE working groups will not be done until next year.

3.4 Component 3: Safer Infrastructure and VehiclesThis component is primarily concerned with ensuring safer road infrastructure and safervehicles and progress in each aspect is as follows:

3.4.1 Safer road InfrastructureConsiderable progress has been made in the planning of relevant workshops and trainingcourses and in identification and EU approval of the specialists and experts who willparticipate in safe infrastructure training courses and workshops. The planning of theworkshops and training courses is now complete and the content, case studies, lectures andtraining materials are being prepared since the courses are due to commence from Mid-September 2014. The courses include a regional workshop on the EU Directive on safety inroad tunnels, 3 sub regional courses on design, construction and operation of roads followedby three “Train the Trainer” courses for road safety auditors and blackspot managementspecialists. There will also be guidance on freight routing to avoid residential areas. Once thetraining courses and workshops are implemented and all local experts trained, the Projectteam experts will provide follow up inputs in each country to support the newly trained localexperts.

3.4.2 Safer vehiclesActivities in this area will not commence until Jan 2015 so little has been done to date, apartfrom identifying the specialist and starting to plan his workshops and schedule of visits. Thesame specialist will be nominated to provide guidance on both vehicle design standards/regulations and on vehicle inspections, as he is well qualified in both areas. After theimplementation of a regional workshop on these topics he will visit countries where needed




to organise a 2 day workshop in each country for the small group of key persons dealing withthis issue. This work will not commence until early 2015.

3.5 Component 4: Communications and visibilityThis task has commenced and the project team have already undertaken a number ofinitiatives to raise awareness of this EU funded project. These can be grouped under anumber of categories.

3.5.1 Short articles that can be used by EU Delegations in each countryThese are short 3-4 page articles summarising the local road safety problem, numbers ofdeaths, losses to the economy etc. in each country and how that compares to EU countriesaverage figures. The paper then shows how EU through the EU funded TRACECA RoadSafety Project is assisting TRACECA countries and building capacity to address this problemto reduce such recurring losses. These short country specific articles have been handed toEU Delegations and can be used by such Delegations in each country in local media to raiseawareness of road safety and also the positive role that EU is playing in helping that countryto address this growing and urgent problem. Nine such articles have been handed over toEU Delegations and these have been much appreciated and welcomed by the Ambassadorsand their public relations staff (only Turkmenistan article remains to be prepared and this willbe done as soon as data becomes available).

3.5.2 Participation in workshops/seminars on road safety to make presentationsPresentations on the EU funded TRACECA regional road safety project have been given atvarious locations, sometimes by arrangement beforehand and sometimes at short notice onrequest by conference organisers if there is space on the programme (KE1 is well knowninternationally in road safety circles and often gets asked to say a few words on road safetyissues at conferences/workshops if he is around and if there is space on the programme).Presentations have been given:1 At an International Road Safety seminar organised by Dutch government and Georgiagovernment being held in Tblisi, Georgia (given by KE2 at zero cost to project as it was donewhile KE2 was visiting Georgia during fact finding mission in February 2014).2 At an International Road Safety conference organised by Serbian Road Safety Agencyand Govt of Serbia which was going on in Belgrade in March 2014. This was given by KE1when he was in Belgrade at the time working on current project activities (team had movedthere temporarily while preparing Inception Report because of the troubles / risk in Kiev).3 At an international workshop on road safety organised/sponsored in Kiev by BritishEmbassy and local road safety NGO+EASST in March 2014 (given by KE1 and RPC whenKE1 and RPC were in Kiev at the time).4 At the first National Road Safety Forum organised by Ukraine traffic police and local roadsafety NGOs with assistance / advice from KE1 and RPC to encourage dialogue amongstkey stakeholders on the need to do something about road safety in July 2014 (presentationgiven by KE1 and RPC at zero cost to project since both KE1 and RPC were in Kiev at thattime).




First Road Safety forum in Ukraine (about 100 participants). Project team (Alan Ross andMariya Ivchenko) encouraged/assisted/advised organisers and made a presentation on theEU funded TRACECA Regional Road Safety Project.

3.5.3 Website /TRACECA portalThe project details are in the process of being uploaded to the TRACECA website/portal tobe there alongside all the other EU funded projects. This will be completed shortly andproject information and documents will be downloadable from that site (http://www.traceca-org.org/en/technical-assistance/traceca-road-safety-ii/downloads).

3.5.4 EU funded TRACECA Regional road safety project vertical banner

Because of the large number of workshops to be held indifferent countries over the next few months we haveprepared a EU visibility vertical banner that can be placed at thedoor of the venue wherever we are holding the workshop/training course. This has the EU and TRACECA logos inlarge size at the top and much smaller Safege consortiamembers’ logos at the bottom to show that it is an EU projectThe information is in English and Russian

This vertical banner (on a stand) will be placed at the door to allProject workshops/training courses so all can see it is an EU project.




3.6 Miscellaneous issues

3.6.1 Getting EU approvals:There are no major issues of concern except that there are a great many workshops andtraining courses to be completed over the next 6 months and this very tight programme willrequire quick turnaround on request for approvals for missions and workshops. In manycases, we may not have the final names of participants but hope that approval can be givenon our assurance that the correct persons will attend. We will ensure that in all ourcorrespondence with country TRACECA Secretaries and beneficiary ministries that weemphasize that we must get relevant persons to attend the training or workshops and thatthey must be persons who will then go back to their normal job to put into practice what theyhave been trained in on our project.

The project team hopes the EU Programme Manager can give quick approvals even if someminor details are still missing at the time of our request. The reason is that organisational andlogistical issues plus getting official delegates nominated and other aspects take a lot of timein most of the project-related countries, which requires that we obtain related EU approvalseveral weeks before the event and without knowing or having every detail finalised.Moreover, air tickets or hotel bookings if purchased at the last minute increase relatedIncidental Expenditure costs, which we want to avoid.

3.6.2 Ukraine as a beneficiary country.The project office is in Kiev and it is understood and accepted that project office related costsand expenses are covered by other arrangements. However, in any activities related toUkraine as a TRACECA beneficiary country (e.g. workshops, training, etc.) we need to treatcosts and expenses in Ukraine for our project team in exactly the same way as such costsand expenses are treated in other beneficiary countries, even if the Project Office is locatedin Kiev. This means that any costs related to workshops/ meetings or efforts/activities aimedat improving safety in Ukraine need to be treated in same way as if they were done inanother beneficiary country (e.g. IE costs related to taxis to / organisation of meetings,translations, rental of meeting or conference rooms, per diems for visiting project staff etc. asthese are all workshop implementation related costs and not in any way related to the projectoffice functions and activities).

3.6.3 Deviations from work planThe only significant deviation from the work plan is that the Turkmenistan national action-planning workshop has had to be postponed from July 2014 to Jan 2015. There was agovernment reshuffle of Ministers and some reorganisation of government departments inthe week that the Turkmenistan workshop was supposed to be implemented. As aconsequence, the workshop had to be postponed. Unfortunately, because of the fullprogramme of workshops to be done in the other countries, the earliest date when theTurkmenistan workshop can be rescheduled is January 2015. The dates are being finalised /agreed with relevant authorities in Turkmenistan.

3.6.4 Resource utilizationA summary of the resources consumed to date is given below. More details about mandaysconsumed are presented in Annex D




Although the KE mandays consumed as a percentage are greater than the project timeconsumed, this is only to be expected because the project team have been engaged indetailed planning of the staffing, workshops and training courses that will be implementedover the remainder of the project. The non-key STE experts’ time and non key junior expertsJTE time consumed and incidental budget spent to date as a %age is far below the projecttime because their and other STE and JTE inputs will not really start to any significant extentuntil the workshops and training activities commence in September 2014. It was anticipatedthat the inputs of key expert time would be greater in year 1 than in year 2 as the bulk of the,assessment of needs, planning of workshops, and recruitment of experts etc. has all had tobe done during the first 6 months of the project.

4 Adjustments to TOR and contract amendments (if any) duringcurrent reporting period

The proposed very minor adjustments to the TOR as a result of the fact-finding trip werepresented and explained in the inception report and there have been no further adjustmentsto TOR or any contract amendments since the Inception report.

5 Project planning for the next period

The next reporting period will be 15 July 2014 – 14 January 2015. Annex C presents theschedule of workshops as currently planned for the next 6 months and as can be seen this isa very tight and hectic schedule and most of them will have been implemented during thenext reporting period. The workshops and training courses for the following 6 months Jan–July 2015 will be presented in the next interim report.

Although this intensive programme of workshops does put an immense pressure on theproject team this has been done for a purpose. If all the main capacity building workshopscan be completed and the draft action plans prepared by the end of year 1, this will leave 12months clear for the project team and the various short term experts to provide follow upcountry specific support as needed to help those implementing in each country. There areinevitably obstacles and impediments that will be encountered as implementationcommences and which will prevent or disrupt effective implementation of the action plans.Our team of experts will closely monitor the implementation process in each country andintervene where needed to try to keep implementation on track so that we deliver the desiredoutcomes and make significant progress in relation to the position at the start of the project.

ItemProject

timeconsumed

Mandays consumed Incidental budgetconsumed

to dateKey

expertsNon keyexperts(STE)

Non KeyExperts (JTE )

At end of first 6months 25% 36.8% 0.9% 14.1% 5.7%




We anticipate this will lead to far greater impact and progress towards achievement of theimpact indicators than if we just developed the action plans sometime next year and left themfor the countries to implement without such additional assistance and support.

6 Annexes

There are five annexes attached to this report.Annex A: Current status of Action Plan in each country

Annex B: Man days input to date (up to end of first period)

Annex C: Proposed workshops and training courses programme –next period

Annex D: Characteristics of road safety in TRACECA beneficiary countries

Annex E: Revised work schedule and staffing chart

The first presents the current status of implementation of the recommendations in the sectorsidentified within the regional action plan. The second Annex summarises indicates the mandays consumed during the last 6 months. Annex C gives the proposed programme ofworkshops and training courses and the fourth annex, Annex D, outlines extracts someinformation from the Benchmarking report to summarise the scale and characteristics of theroad safety problem in the TRACECA beneficiary countries. Annex E presents the revisedtentative activity chart and staffing plan giving more detail about the staffing, activities andinputs and taking into account of the postponement of the Turkmenistan workshop.

END




6.1 ANNEX A: Current Status of Action Plan implementation bycountry

This annex presents the status of Action plan implementation in each country at projectcommencement. The first chart A.1 shows the current status of implementation of the overallaction plan for all 10 countries. The charts A.2-A.7 show the status of implementation foreach of the 6 sectors identified for action in the Regional road safety action plan. Theseseven charts give an overview of the current status of implementation and it is seen thateven in the countries that have implemented most, only around 30% or so of the desiredprogress and outcomes are as yet in place. Hence, considerable further work is required inall countries to increase the degree of implementation.

The following spider charts show the current status of achievement in each country as apercentage towards the desired status of full implementation. These percentage scores arebased on the amalgamated achievement scores of the various impact indicators and moredetail about the impact indicators used etc. is given in the Benchmarking report. The scorefor each country is connected by the black line to give an overview of the picture across the10 TRACECA countries.

A.1 Road safety action planMost of the countries are at 30 -40% towards the desired level ofimplementation and some (e.g.Kyrgyzstan and Turkmenistan) arestill only at around 10-20% of theway towards implementation.Considerable effort will need to beapplied to move these countriesforward.




A.2 Institutional improvementsIn this sector, Kazakhstan andGeorgia appear to be the furthestahead and are both at around 50%of the way towards completion. Theothers are at around 30-40% of theway there but Turkmenistan andespecially Kyrgyzstan at 10-15%again appear to lag far behind theother countries in the Region. Oncethe specific areas of strength areidentified in Kazakhstan andGeorgia where they have beenparticularly successful inimplementation, they could be usedas potential role models for theothers in this sector.

A.3 Safe Road InfrastructureIn this sector, all countries are inneed of improvement andKyrgyzstan, Armenia and Moldova(all at around 30-40%) appear to bethe furthest ahead whileKazakhstan, Uzbekistan andTurkmenistan appear to be thefurthest behind. This is surprisingas Kazakhstan in other respects isconsidered amongst the strongercountries in the region in respect tosafety engineering. The scoresneed to be rechecked with localexperts.




A.4 Safer Vehicles andStandardsIn this sector Moldova (at around90%) seems way ahead of theothers who are at 60-70%. Thoselagging behind in this sector areTurkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan whoare both at around 10% andUkraine, which is at around 20%. Inthis sector, Moldova could be therole model for others to follow.

A.5 Safer Road UsersIn this sector, a number ofcountries are at around 50% butKazakhstan appears to be doingless well than its neighbours areand is reported to have very littleactivity going on in this sector.Uzbekistan is also only at around20-30% so will need additionalattention in this area. Data willneed to be rechecked and localspecialists consulted during theworkshops to verify if this isaccurate.




A.6 Emergency Medical ServicesThis sector plays a crucial role inminimizing deaths once a crashhas occurred. From the datareceived, Kazakhstan appears tobe by far the furthest ahead in thissector with an overall score of80%. Apart from Georgia, which isat around 50%, most of the othercountries are at around 20-30%.Consequently, Kazakhstan may bea potential role model for thissector.

A.7 Changing attitudesThis sector is very underdeveloped in all 10 countries withonly Georgia and Armenia showingprogress of around 30%. All othercountries display progress of onlyaround 10 %.

All countries will needstrengthening in this area and thereappear to be no strong role modelsthat can be used from the region.




6.2 ANNEX B: Man days input to date (up to end of first period)

Month

KEY EXPERT INPUTS NON KEY EXPERT INPUTS

Alan RossTeam leader

KE1

Dejan JovanovSenior safety

EngineerKE2

Gela Kvashilava

Turkmenistanworkshops

STE1 -1

PoghosShahinyan

Turkmenistanworkshops

STE2 -1

MariyaIvchenko

Regional ProjectCoordinator

J18

15-30 January 2014 13 13 - -February 2014 27 24 - - 18March 2014 18.5 15 - - 22April 2014 16 - - - 22

May 2014 18.5 - 4 - 19

June 2014 18 8 - - 19

1-14 July 2014 9 4 2 3 13

Inputs this period 120 64 6 3 113

Inputs in previous periods - - - - -

Total input to date 120 64 6 3 113

Contracted days 300 200 12 8 400

Mandays remaining 180 134 4 5 287




6.3 ANNEX C: Proposed workshops and training coursesprogramme –next period

Date WorkshopNumber

Type Location

Content/Topicarea

Personsattending bycountry

Project teaminvolved

Comment

15July – 14 August 2014

nil

15August – 14September 2014

11-12 Sept 3-W002 Reg Bishkek EU directive onsafety intunnels

All countries2 per country

= 2x10 = 20

KE2 + STE11 All 10 countries to eachsend 2 tunnel designspecialists

15 September – 14 October 2014

18-19 Sept 3-W001-1 SubReg

Kiev Safety elementson road design

2 countries

2x 6 = 12

KE2, STE9-1,

STE9-2, STE12-1

Ukraine and Moldova 6 percountry on 2 day course

22-26 Sept 3-W004-1 Sub

Reg

Kiev RSA Train theTrainers

2 countries

2x 3 = 6

KE2,STE12-1,STE10,STE12-2

STE9-1

Ukraine + Moldova 3 percountry on 5 day TOT course

23-26 Sept 2-W008 Nat Kiev Road safetyAction planning

1 country

40-50 pers

KE1, RPC, KE2,STE1-2, STE2-2

Ukraine national road safetyaction plan wkshop

30 Sep- 3Oct 2-W005 Nat Astana Road safetyAction planning

1 country

40-50 pers


Kazakhstan national roadsafety action plan wkshop

15 October -14 November 2014

16-17 Oct 3-W001-2 SubReg

Tblisi Safetyelements onroad design

3 countries

3x 6 = 18

KE2, STE9-1,

STE9-2, STE12-1

Georgia , ArmeniaAzerbaijan 6 per country on2 day course

20-24 Oct 3-W004-2 Sub

Reg

Tblisi RSA Train theTrainers

3 countries

3x 3 = 9


STE9-1

Georgia , ArmeniaAzerbaijan 3 per country on5 day TOT course

20-21 Oct 2-W010-3

GRSP

SubReg

Chisinau Regionalawareness

10 personsper country

KE1 , RPC GRSP 5day Wkshop shortinput only from us to establinks / create expert workinggroup in each country

27-28 Oct 2-W010-2

GRSP

SubReg

Tblisi? Regionalawareness



28-31 Oct 2-W003 Nat Tblisi Road safetyActionplanning

1 country

40-50 pers


Georgia national road safetyaction plan wkshop

3-4 Nov 2-W010-1

GRSP

SubReg

Astana? Regionalawareness






4-7 Nov 2-W004 Nat Chisinau Road safetyActionplanning

1 country

40-50 pers


Moldova national roadsafety action plan wkshop

11-14 Nov 2-W009 Nat Tashkent Road safetyActionplanning

1 country

40-50 pers


Uzbekistan national roadsafety action plan wkshop

13-14 Nov 3-W001-3 SubReg

Astana Safetyelements onroad design

5 countries

5x 6 = 30

KE2, STE9-1,

STE9-2, STE12-1

Kazakhstan , Kyrgyzstan,Tajikistan , UzbekistanTurkmenistan 6 per countryon 2 day design course

15 November – 14 December 2014

17-21Nov 3-W004-3 Sub

Reg

Astana RSA Train theTrainers

5 countries

5x 3 = 15


STE9-1

Kazakhstan , Kyrgyzstan,Tajikistan , UzbekistanTurkmenistan 3 per countryon 5 day TOT course

18 – 21 Nov 3-W006 Nat Bishkek Road safetyActionplanning

1 country

40-50 pers


Kyrgyzstan national roadsafety action plan wkshop

25-28 Nov 3-W001 Nat Yerevan Road safetyActionplanning

1 country

40-50 pers


Armenia national roadsafety action plan wkshop

2-5 Dec 3-W002 Nat Baku Road safetyActionplanning

1 country

40-50 pers

KE1, RPC, KE2,STE1-2,

Azerbaijan national roadsafety action plan wkshop

3-5 Dec 2-W011 Reg Astana orAlmaty

EU/UNECEagreements +Conventions

10 countries

10 x 3= 30

STE5 , STE4-1,STE4-2, STE4 -3

Regional wkshop in Astana

15December 2014 – 14 January 2015

13-16Jan 1-W001 Nat Ashgabat Road safetyActionplanning

1 country

40-50 pers


Turkmenistan national roadsafety action plan wkshop

Probably 20-23 Jan 2015 but not included here because it falls into the next reporting period Tajikistan national roadsafety action plan wkshop

Reg = Regional (all 10 countries), Sub Reg = Sub regional (2, 3 or 5 countries depending onsub region, Nat = National (country level -1 country only)Blue text in table indicates that this is a grsp workshop into which the Safege project team willprovide some input (or 2 days inputs) to provide some input on technical issues, to provide aholistic overview of safety problems and to meet and to start working with the 10representatives key stakeholders from each country at the GRSP workshops. They will bebecome the country level expert working group with whom the project team will work closelyand develop for each country for the remainder of the project.




6.4 ANNEX D: Characteristics of road safety in TRACECAbeneficiary countries

D1. Scale, nature and characteristics of the problem

This Annex is an extract from the Benchmarking report and provides a summary of the scaleand characteristics of the road safety problem in the region. In order to make internationalcomparisons of crash data, it is necessary to correct for differing definitions used in differentcountries and also to make corrections to reflect under reporting. Under reporting occurs in allcountries, to a greater or lesser extent in police reported road deaths. Such corrections andadjustments for under reporting are made based on the degree of development of medicalfacilities, numbers of medical and nursing staff, other health related factors and statistics etc.to give an estimate of the probable road deaths likely to be occurring in each country. As partof the UN Decade of Road Safety, WHO has been making such estimates for all 179 UNmember countries and publishing a document9 every 2 years giving comparable data thatcan be used to compare countries. The last such report was published in 2013 and containsestimates of the data for the year 2010. The next report is due to be published in 2015 andwill have corrected data for the year 2013.

Since publication of the most recent WHO global status report in 2013, some further researchhas been funded by the World bank10 and this was based on a wider sample of data andprovides even more accurate estimates of the numbers of deaths and injuries in each countryof the world. The results for the TRACECA countries in that report are presented in table D1-1overleaf. This shows that the police in the 10 beneficiary countries of the region reported atotal of 16,142 deaths in 2010 but the region is estimated to have actually suffered a total ofaround 21500 road deaths, 161,000, hospitalizing injuries and nearly 1,211,000 non-hospitalizing injuries.

Road deaths and disabilities can have a devastating social impact on the victims and theirfamilies and can cause severe financial difficulties for the families of those killed or injured –especially if they were the wage earners of the family. Such large numbers of deaths andinjuries are also undoubtedly a drain upon the medical and financial resources and can costcountries 3-5% of annual GDP. Action can and should be taken to reduce such losses.

Figure D1-2 presents summary information for the 10 TRACECA countries showing theestimated deaths and injuries in 2010 and the fatality rates/100,000 population. It can be seenthat drivers (including car occupants) are the most exposed road user group concerning roadfatalities (53%) in 10 TRACECA countries. After that, pedestrians are highly exposed (34%) oftotal road deaths. This data offers insights into the major areas for possible interventions inTRACECA countries, which are covered by Regional Road Safety Action Plan.

Whereas the road safety situation in the TRACECA countries remains a serious problem,there is considerable evidence from some of the former soviet countries that significantimprovements can be made in road safety if there is sufficient government commitment and ifsuitable proven, targeted interventions are implemented to improve road safety.

9 Global status of road safety report, WHO, Geneva, 201310 Transport for Health: The global burden of disease from motorised road transport, Institute for health metricsand evaluation and The World Bank, Washington, 2014




The last column in Table D1-1 shows deaths per 100,000 inhabitants and shows that the risks of road death are highest in Kazakhstan (at25 deaths/100,000 population), Kyrgyzstan (22 deaths per 100,000 population and Ukraine (18 deaths per 100,000 population). This tableshows the countries, which can and should do more reduce risks of dying in road accidents.

From the foregoing it is clear that the situation in many TRACECA countries has been deteriorating in recent years and that the risk of death orinjury in the region is significantly higher than it is in the EU countries. One encouraging factor that TRACECA countries need to note is thatincreasing deaths and injuries are not necessarily inevitable and that action can be taken to improve the situation even if a country does nothave EU systems and government structures in place. Table 2.3.2 overleaf shows that such improvements are possible and can deliver resultseven in countries, which had similar systems and structures to those, which still exist in some TRACECA countries.

Table D-1-1 Estimated deaths and injuries in TRACECA countries

Country

Deathsofficiallyreportedby Police

GBD estimates, 2010 Deaths by road user group Deaths per100,000

populationDeaths Hospitalized injuries

NonHospitalized

injuriesPedestrians Bicyclists

MotorcycleRiders

Drivers + VehicleOccupants Other

Number % age Number % age Number % age Number % age Number % ageArmenia 285 474 4,230 30,950 161 34 18 4 14 3 265 56 14 3 15Azerbaijan 1,202 882 13,728 97,806 238 27 35 4 26 3 546 62 35 4 10Georgia 685 515 5,320 38,373 46 9 20 4 20 4 417 81 10 2 12Moldova 452 534 5,660 41,007 154 29 37 7 53 10 240 45 48 9 15Kazakhstan 3,379 3,965 19,011 151,016. 1,030 26 158 4 158 4 2,537 64 79 2 25Kyrgyzstan 850 1,161 7,089 54,392 301 26 69 6 81 7 661 57 46 4 22Tajikistan 442 619 9,690 68,664 123 20 30 5 24. 4 408 66 31 5 9Turkmenistan n/a 704 7,197 52,410 161 23 28 4 28 4 471 67 21 3 14Ukraine 6,116 8,007 49,729 381,513 2,962 37 560 7 400 5 3,763 47 400 5 18Uzbekistan 2,731 4,683 39,414 294,804 2,341 50 140 3 46 1 2,013 43 94 2 17Total: 16,142 21,544 161,068 1,210,935 7,523 34 1,101 5 855 4 11326 53 780 4




Table D1-2 shows the very successful safety programmes implemented in several ex-Sovietcountries over the last decade and which have significantly reduced the road deaths andfatality rates in those countries. Consequently, if it can be done in those ex-Soviet countriesthere is no reason why the similar reductions could not be achieved in the TRACECAcountries, many of which also have ex-Soviet systems in place. It also interesting to note theEU despite already having systematically reduced deaths each decade for the last 40 yearsand having already done all the easy things, was still able to reduce its deaths by a further44% over the decade 2001-2010.

Table D1-3 Safety changes in EU and some Former Soviet Union Countries 2001-2011

CountryRoad deaths %Change

2001-2011

Deaths /100.000population

2001 2011 2001 2011

Bulgaria 1011 755 -34.9 12.4 8.9

Czech Republic 1334 802 -47.0 13.0 6.7

Estonia 199 101 -49.2 14.6 7.5

Hungary 1239 638 -48.5 12.1 6.4

Latvia 558 179 -67.9 23.6 8.0

Lithuania 706 297 -57.9 20.2 9.2

Poland 5534 4189 -24.3 14.5 11.0

Romania 2461 2018 -18.0 10.9 9.4

Slovakia 814 324 -47.2 11.6 6.0

Slovenia 278 141 -49.2 14.0 6.9

European Union (EU) 54302 30108 -44.6 11.3 6.0

Figure D1-1 below shows that all of TRACECA countries have higher numbers of deaths per100,000 populations than the ex-Soviet countries, which have joined the EU and haveimplemented the proven safety interventions and systems that has made the EU a worldleader in road safety. There is much that can be learned from the experiences of thecountries who have successfully improved road safety and many of these systems,techniques and capacity building initiatives will be introduced to the region once suitablecountry specific individual road safety action plans are developed and implemented with theassistance of the TRACECA road safety project team.




Figure D1-1 above shows the deaths/100,000 population for the ex-soviet countries whohave taken appropriate action and implemented effective comprehensive safety action plansand the TRACECA countries who are still at an earlier stage of road safety development. Inalmost all cases, the death rates in the TRACECA countries are higher than in these othercountries. In comparison to the EU average rates, the rates in some TRACECA countries(Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Ukraine) the rates are between 3-4 times as high as the EUaverage so there is considerable scope for improvement.In order to understand better how to improved road safety in the region it is necessary tounderstand the road user groups who are most frequently killed or injured in road crashes.Figure D-1-2 overleaf shows the percentage of road users from each road user group whoare killed across in each country. It can be seen that drivers are the most frequent groupkilled but that very large numbers of vulnerable road users are also killed and that most ofthat road user group are pedestrians.Pedestrians have been given inadequate consideration in road design in the past in regionand this is an area that requires significant and urgent attention in future years. The safetyengineering workshops will provide guidance to road designers how safety for all road usersand especially for vulnerable road users (pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists) can beimproved.

Figure D1-1: Deaths per 100,000 population




Figure D1-2: Percentage deaths by Road User Group by Country in 2010

- Pedestrian

- Bicyclist

- Vehicle

Motorcyclerider

- Other

Legend




Figure D1-2 shows that drivers and pedestrians are the main victim groups in every country.and figure D1-3 overleaf shows the aggregated data for the 10 beneficiaries countries acrossthe TRACECA region Overall of those killed, Drivers constitute the biggest group (52 %)followed by pedestrians (35%) Bicyclists and Motorcyclists comprise 5% and 4%respectively.Figure D1-3: Aggregated Regional Deaths by Road User in TRACECA countries

Figure D1-4 below shows the percentage of vulnerable road users killed in each country andvulnerable road users (mostly pedestrians, bicyclists and motorcycle riders) are mostexposed in Uzbekistan (54%), Ukraine (49%) and Moldova (46%).

Figure D1-4 Percentage of Vulnerable Road User Death by country

Understanding of the most exposed road user groups will enable choosing of right countermeasures for improvement of road safety. Adequate implementation of country specific road

- Pedestrians

- Bicyclist

- Vehicle occupant

- Motorcyclist

- Other




safety Action Plans will enable each TRACECA country to undertake systematicimprovement of their road safety situation. It can be seen that in almost all of TRACECAcountries (except Moldova, Uzbekistan and Ukraine) drivers (including car occupants) aremost exposed road user group with %age higher than 50%. Highest %age of drivers and caroccupants are in Georgia (81%), Tajikistan, and Turkmenistan with 66%. Pedestrianspresent the most exposed road user group in Uzbekistan 51%. Pedestrians are also highlyexposed also in Ukraine 37% and Armenia 34%.

TRACECA ROAD SAFETY IIImplementation of the Regional Road Safety Action Plan for the Neighbourhood East and Central Asia December

Calendar weeks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4Project weeks 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105

WORK PLAN - Activities and sub-activitiesInception phase (2 months) - COMPONENT A (Inception activities)A.1 Review/establishment of possible project officesA.1.1 Introductory meetings (EC/consortia/key experts)A.1.2 Administrative issues and logistics (ISO 9001 st. and PM procedures, checklists, …)A.2 Identification of potential local support staffA.3 Mobilisation of the project teamA.3.1 Planning/logistics/letters out to funders, countries, Traceca Secretariat / visasA.3.2 Recruit staff / set up project office in Kiev + liaise with other TRACECA projectsA.3.2 TRACECA Secretariat engagement/liaison visitA.4 Country visits for initial meetings ( see attached below )A.4.1 Develop or update main Road Safety Stakeholders mapA.5 Collection and processing of basic information on progress to dateA.5.1 Distribution during visits of survey questionnaires to TRACECA countriesA.5.2 Initial analysis of current situation, needs and impedimentsA.6 Gap analysis of ToR assumptions and actual situation in the fieldA.7 Exploration of possible options for Project Steering Committee if neededA.8 Development of revised project implementation planA.8.1 Development of Training and Institutional strengthening planA.8.2 Preparation a short Inception Report

Implementation phase (21 months)COMPONENT 1: Inclusion of Turkmenistan in the TRACECA Regional Road Safety Action Plan1.1 Inform and mobilise1.1.1 Job descriptons and selection of individual experts for project tasks1.1.1 National visits to arrange downstream inclusion activity /initial assessments1.1.2 Awareness Raising, assessment and action plan workshop1.1.3 Stakeholder identification / mobilisation for assessment and action plan workshops1.2 Assessment Rating1.2.1 Analysis of data1.2.2 Assessment rating for Turkmenistan (based on discussions with stakeholders)1.2.3 Road Map ( action plan) of priority activities for Turkmenistan to join TRACECA countries

COMPONENT 2: Regulatory and institutional reforms2.1 TA and training2.1.1 Sub -Regional awareness raising workshops- inputs to 3 GRSP workshops2.1.2 National Action Planning Workshop in country - 10 countries2.1.3 EU/ECE agreements + conventions regional workshop2.1.4 Implementation support for Agreements and conventions incl national workshops2.1.5 Review of current crash data systems and analyses2.1.6 Recommendations for improvement of country crash databases/data analysis2.1.7 Workshop + Recommendations on a centralised crash database (RS Observatory)2.1.8 Identifying of researchers for accident costing studies on national level2.1.9 Training workshop for researchers2.1.10 Accident costing studies and mentoring of researchers2,1.11 Speciaalised training of of multisector coordination expert groups in each country2.2 Study tours and UNECE working groups2.2.1 Study tours (3) of good practice countries2.2.2 Participation in 4 UNECE working groups2.3 Position papers, guidelines, policy & background docs (as and when needed )

COMPONENT 3: Safer infrastructure and vehicles3.1 Safer infrastructure3.1.1 Review and enhance safety engineering aspects of road design standards x x x3.1.2 Training on safety elements of road design, construction and maintenance 1 2 33.1.3 Introduction to EU Directive on safety in road tunnels 13.1.4 Prepare sample templates on Road Safety Audit policies/legislation x3.1.5 Implement regional "train the trainer" road safety audit courses including black spot management 1 2 33.1.6 Support the implementation of " in country" road safety audit training courses3.1.7 Support programes on road safety audits, black spot management and inspection3.1.8 Prepare guidance on freight/through traffic routing to avoid residental areas x3.1.9 Support development of pilot routes schemes as examples3.1.10 Promotion of pilot case studies and sharing of best practice3.2 Safer vehicles3.2.1 Training on international best practices for technical inspection of vehicles 13.2.2 Training on international recognised motor vehicle safety regulations/standards 1

COMPONENT 4: Communication and visibility4.1 Elaboration of projects Communication strategy4.2 Communication/visability activities (website, logos, publications, press articles)

Final Phase (1 months) - COMPONENT B (Project finalisation activities)B.1 Visibility events (in country wrap-up meetings plus a regional event)B.2 Final Report

January February March April May June July August September October November December January February March April May June July August September October November December JanuaryCalendar weeks 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 1 2 3 4

Project weeks 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105

ReportingInception Report6 monthly progress reportsDraft Final ReportFinal Report

STAFF SCHEDULESProject Experts TOT. MD

Team Leader Dr Alan Ross (300 MD) 5 5 5 300KE2 - Roads Dr Dejan Jovanov (200 MD) 13 21 15 0 0 7 8 15 22 22 17 0 5 5 5 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 10 10 4 200

STE 1-1: Country planning workshops and y road safety assestment one expert - TUR (12 MD) 2 2 4 12STE1-2: Action planning workshops expert - (12 MD) 2 2 2 2 2 2 12STE 2: Country road safety assestment one expert - TUR (8 MD ) 2 2 4 8STE2-2: Action planning workshops expert - (28 MD) 5 5 5 5 4 4 28STE 3: Road Safety Seminars and Training experts (100 MD) 5 experts 10 15 15 15 15 15 5 5 5 100STE 4: EU/ECE agreements + conventions experts - (40 MD) 3 -4 experts 12 7 7 7 7 40STE 5: EU/ECE agreements + conventions one expert - (30 MD) 2 2 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2 30STE 6: Crash data system (60 MD) two experts 7 7 7 9 10 10 10 60STE 7: Crash data system (GIS) one expert (15 MD) 10 5 15STE 8: Crash costs studIies experts one expert (25-30 days) from each of 10 countries= total 285 MD 40 40 40 40 40 30 30 25 285STE 9-1 Safety Engineer I (design standards) Expert (40 MD) 11 9 9 11 40STE 9-2 Safety Engineer I (design standards) Expert (10 MD) 1 3 3 3 10STE 10: Safety Engineer II (black spot) Expert (10 MD) 3 3 2 2 10STE 11: Safety Engineer III (tunnel safety) Expert (15 MD) 8 7 15STE 12-1: Road Safety Auditor Expert (50 MD) 11 12 7 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 50STE 12-2: Road Safety Auditor Expert (10 MD) 1 3 3 3 10STE 13: Freight/through traffic routing Expert (20 MD) 1 1 1 7 3 3 4 20STE 14: Technical inspection of vehicles Expert (40 MD) 5 8 8 10 5 4 40STE 15: Motor vehicle safety regulations/standards Expert (15 MD) 3 4 2 2 2 2 15STE 16 : Local experts inputs to training courses ( 100MD) 5 10 10 5 10 10 10 10 10 10 5 5 100STE 17 : Local experts inputs to workshops ( 100MD) 5 15 15 10 10 10 10 10 5 5 5 100

Sub total non key senior experts 1000 MD 4 4 4 76 95 96 108 86 129 126 80 59 46 42 31 14 1000JTE 18: Regional project coordinator (400 MD) 18 22 22 19 19 16 18 18 18 18 18 18 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 400JTE 19: National coordinators (average 2-3 days/ month x 17 months x 10 countries ) = 400 MD 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 24 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 400

Sub total junior experts 800 MD 18 22 22 19 19 16 42 42 42 42 42 42 40 40 40 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 39 800Back up Management and Support staffAnastasia Kovalenko ( secretary /administration assistant )Joanna Tallec, Project Manager, SafegeOlivier Montagnes, Project Manager, SafegeTim Jakeman, Senior Technical Advisor, IMC WorldwideLEGEND December

Deliverable/Report Project start and end x Deliverable intermediate report

Activity Calendar months 1 Activity 1, 2 or 3 in safety engineering

Intermittent activity within defined time Estimated number of days expected to be used in that month

version 220814

February AprilMarchJanuary

1018 18 18 7

February March April May November January October

27 818 722

October

118 8 8 8 13

November December JanuaryJune July August September

13 16

4

WORK PLAN AND STAFF SCHEDULES (tentative and will be modified as required to meet project needs)2014 2015 2016

19

JuneMay

1018

July August September

January February March April May June July August September October November January February March April October November December JanuaryMay June July August September

20

Anastasiia

ANNEX E: Revised work schedule and staffing chart




Implementation of the regional roadsafety Action Plan for the

NeighbourhoodEast and Central Asia

– TRACECA Road Safety IIEuropeAid/133698/C/SER/Multi

Project funded by EU

Implemented by

TRACECA ROAD SAFETY PROJECT

Project Office, Office 12, 10 Artema Street, KievTel +380 442 721 068 Tel/fax +380 443 310 217

Safege Head Office Belgium – Gulledelle 92, B-1200 Brussels,Tel: +32-2-739.46.98, +33-146-14-72-94, Fax: +32.2.742.38.91

Interim Report 1 - TRACECA ORG...Implementation of the Regional Road Safety Action Plan for the...

Documents

Transcript of Interim Report 1 - TRACECA ORG...Implementation of the Regional Road Safety Action Plan for the...